Treatment Options for Turf Toe: A Systematic Review.

Turf toe is hyperextension injury of the plantar plate at the first metatarsophalangeal joint. Etiologies have often included sports/activities with excessive forefoot axial loading and/or violent pivotal movements. The purpose of the systematic review was to systematically review and present an overview for the current evidence-based treatment options of turf toe. Both authors systematically reviewed the PubMed and EMBASE databases from inception to April 2016 based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The level of evidence and quality of evidence were assessed by using the Level of Evidence for Primary Research Question of the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, and the quality of evidence was assessed with use of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Data were collected and categorized into: case reports and case series. Eight studies (16 turf toes) met the aforementioned criteria and were included. Five case reports and 3 case series reported various treatment options for turf toe. Specifically, 3 studies reported solely conservative treatment (n = 5), 1 study reported solely surgical treatment (n = 1), and 4 studies involved patients in conservative and/or surgical treatments (n = 10). All studies were of level of clinical evidence 4 and quality of clinical evidence score 2 (poor quality). Conservative treatment included closed reduction and immobilization, and surgical treatment included plantar plate tenodesis. Restricted dorsiflexion was the most common complication reported. Turf toe is an underreported injury with no evidence-based treatment guideline to date. Future studies of higher level and quality of evidence with a specific classification system (Jahss or Anderson) consistently reported are warranted for the development of an optimal guideline to determine the most appropriate treatment for each specific severity in injury.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection for the Treatment of Hamstring Injuries: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis With Best-Worst Case Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hamstring injuries are common and account for considerable time lost to play in athletes. Platelet-rich plasma has potential as a means to accelerate healing of these injuries. PURPOSE: (1) To present the evidence of platelet-rich plasma injection in the treatment of hamstring injuries, (2) evaluate the "best-case scenario" in dichotomous outcomes, and (3) evaluate the "worst-case scenario" in dichotomous outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Two authors systematically reviewed the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, with any discrepancies resolved by mutual consensus. The level of evidence was assessed per the criteria of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine and the quality of evidence by the Coleman Methodology Score. Meta-analysis by fixed effects models was used if heterogeneity was low (I2 < 25%) and random effects models if heterogeneity was moderate to high (I2≥ 25%). P values <.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 10 studies were included with 207 hamstring injuries in the platelet-rich plasma group and 149 in the control group. Random-effects model for mean time to return to play that compared platelet-rich plasma + physical therapy to physical therapy alone non-significantly favored platelet-rich plasma + physical therapy (mean difference, -5.67 days). The fixed effects model for reinjury rates, which also compared platelet-rich plasma + physical therapy with physical therapy alone nonsignificantly favored platelet-rich plasma + physical therapy (risk ratio, 0.88). The best-case scenario fixed effects model for reinjury rates nonsignificantly favored platelet-rich plasma + physical therapy (risk ratio, 0.82). The worst-case scenario fixed effects model for reinjury rates nonsignificantly favored physical therapy alone (risk ratio, 1.13). The mean ± SD complication rate for either postinjection discomfort, pain, or sciatic nerve irritation was 5.2% ± 2.9% (range, 2.7% to 9.1%). CONCLUSION: There has been statistically nonsignificant evidence to suggest that PRP injection ± PT reduced mean time to RTP or reinjury rates compared to no treatment or PT alone for hamstring injuries in a short-term follow-up. The complication profiles were favorable. Further studies of high quality and large cohorts are needed to better support or disprove the consensus of the systematic review and meta-analysis.